Valve Rumored To Be Working On "Steam Box" PC Console

The raging battle of words between PC gamers and console gamers has never quite reached PC vs. Mac levels of animosity, but it's come close. Could those angry days be coming to an end? Probably not, but if anybody could convince the two camps to pick up their virtual arms in unison and start singing "Kumbaya," it's Valve -- and rumors floating around say that Valve is developing a console-esque box designed to let gamers get their Steam on in the living room.

The so-called "Steam Box" even has some specs attached to it: a Core i7 CPU, 8GB of RAM, and an NVIDIA GPU. TheVerge (who broke the news) also points out that Valve filed for a patent on a gaming controller with swappable components in 2011, although the publication says that several USB-powered peripherals would also be compatible with the Steam Box. Biometric feedback is also rumored to be involved in some way. As far as software goes, the Steam Box is reported to be able to run any PC title and even competitor services like EA's Origin.

Rather than building Steam Boxes on its own, Valve is said to be developing a Steam Box spec and allowing hardware suitors to build Boxes themselves. (Kinda like *shudder* the 3DO?) TheVerge reports that an early version was shown to potential behind closed doors at CES, and Valve could officially unveil the Steam Box at the GDC or E3 gaming conventions.

Sound crazy? Remember that Gabe Newell said “Well, if we have to sell hardware we will," just a few weeks back -- although he quickly followed it up with "It’s definitely not the first thought that crosses our mind; we’d rather hardware people that are good at manufacturing and distributing hardware do that." While that may be taken as a denial, the wording fits into the rumored spec-based multiple-manufacturer plans for the Steam Box.

What do you think: is the Steam Box the next hip thing or just next year's contender for best vaporware? Would you be interested in hooking up a PC gaming console to your flatscreen? How much would you pay?

Comments

a friend's sister-in-law makes $65 hourly on the laptop. She has been laid off for 6 months but last month her pay was $19426 just working on the laptop for a few hours. Go to this web site and read more NuttyRichdotcom

I don't know what to think . Everybody knows Valve works on Steam client for Linux. Maybe there will be some kind of " Steam Distro " ? Maybe this maybe that , who knows. I know one thing for sure Valve has history of making some pleasant surprises and it's full of geniuses . If their are making some product it's usually top notch. Gabe is not an idiot. So let's just wait and see.

I have had some form of Steam box since around 2004ish. It had an AMD Athlon 2800+, and ATI Radeon 9800AIW. Currently my Steam box has an Intel i7 875K, and a Radeon 5870HD.

This should tell you that I really don't see a market for it. Given the specs, that look to be quite expensive. I can't see the XBOX /PS3/ Nintendo crowd going for it, and as illustrated above the PC gamers already have their Steam boxes.

Also given the history; who remembers the ironically named Phantom box?

So really other than licensed cases, keyboards and mice or perhaps a boutique PC built on the theme ala Alienware. I can't believe this is anything more than vaporware. Which coincidentally is exactly what steam is.

By off-handedly criticizing the 3DO, you only show how deeply you've bought into the propaganda from Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo. And how far you've strayed from your own editorial mandate.

In fact, the 3DO was a decent platform. More importantly, it was the last hope for the console world to escape its current frozen logjam of proprietary silos. The failure of the 3DO probably set gaming back a good 20 years. Imagine a desktop world tightly controlled by Mac OS, with no Microsoft or GNU/Linux. Or a smartphone world with no Android. Ugh.

Sure, the open alternative tends to have a few more rough edges than the proprietary padded cell. But it ALWAYS represents the maximum potential for innovation. This is something I really should not have to point out to a publication styling itself 'MaximumPC.'

If (gods grant) there is a Steam Box, will you be any wiser? Will you throw your weight behind openness and innovation? Or will you snidely nit-pick it to death?

Actually, I was one of the folks who bought a 3DO. That shudder was more for the horrible failure that it turned out to be, more than a criticism of the platform. I loved getting my Samurai Showdown, D, Flashback and Road Rash on! The 3DO Road Rash was the best Road Rash ever.

I hope it is true, and I hope it is a commercial success. It removes the excuses from companies for not focusing on PC gaming.
PC’s are too diverse and hard to develop for.
Well here is a new basic minimum system requirement to shoot for. For those of us with bigger budgets and willing to build our own that means we will have PC games, and hopefully can up the setting to get more eye candy and FPS, but at least the game will be based on minimum PC hardware spec.
Software developers complain about piracy.
Steams DRM is not perfect, but is still a nice standard that offers a certain amount of piracy protection.
Software developers complain about cost.
Steam is a great way to go direct digital distribution cutting down on cost.
Console gamers complain about cost of PCs.
Well standardizing system requirements will allow for a certain economies of scale and lower prices for PC based Steambox.

Since they have USB and it is to be an open standard it sound like it would be able to use normal mouse, and keyboard. Giving it HTC capability would be easy. With PC it might even be able to be upgraded in a simple and easy way, instead of the very lengthy upgrade cycle of consoles where the whole system is scrapped.

$300 for an i7-2600
$100 for a mobo like the ASRock P67 Pro3
$40 for 8GB DDR3 1600
$75 for 500 GB HDD
$15 for an optical drive
$200 for a 560 Ti
$80 for mass-produced case/PSU

Slightly over $800, and it meets all the rumour's specs and makes a pretty decent gaming system. Assuming an OEM discount to Valve with no mark-up, $500-$600 is by no means out of the question (especially with Ivy Bridge on the horizon)

This will be a hard market for Valve to get into. To push any of the newest games at above playable framerates at HDTV resolutions 1920x1080 isn't a challenge with even the middle-line of current processing power and video technology. The bottom end of hardware needed might be a reasonable price for a basic set-top-box form factor Steam box.

Valve should take gaming to a NEW level and develop a dedicated 3-monitor (or multi-monitor) rig that can deliver Steam games in surround mode with up to WHUXGA 7680×4800 resolution. This would deliver something that we can't get right now due to drivers/game-engine/graphics technology only sparsely supporting multiple display devices.

If Valve does move into the hardware game it may allow two or more players on one rig. Maybe traditionally on one display in split screen; but how cool would it be to be able to do it on two displays? With PC graphics card tech this could be possible. To really compete with the social nature of consoles two or more players on one system would be a good step (this might be hinted at in the article for a reason they are building their own usb/interface devices).

I've always found it a huge waste that I have two monitors, and could easily plug in another mouse and keyboard. Why can't I have a local second player NOW? Someone has got to be able to make that work. Some developer should make it a gimmick in an upcoming otherwise generic first person shooter.

They're not looking to go niche, they're looking to make it a widely attractive alternative to the shitBox and the PoS3. How many people do you know rock multi-monitor setups? And how many of those would buy a pre-built system instead of building their own? Get real.

I did. First system I had was pre-built. Added a video card + power supply and changed the case and it played next to all games I bought and installed off of steam.

Later, motherboard died and upgraded the system with hand-picked motherboard, processor, and RAM. still can play every game and better now. Why'd I buy a pre-buit system? It takes alot of research and time to figure out what hardware would work well with each other. Some customers would have someone else do that for them, or the customers would just go buy a console. Even as a PC-Tech I still find it a bit annoying to do all that work (though at the same time still satisfying) to go through the technical details to get a piece of hardware working.

If only the internet had more people like you that lacked vision. Also, I'm happy to hear that you know so many facts about a story that's mostly conjecture. It's nice that you were able to read into my wish list as items that I clearly championed as necessity before any thing named Steam Box could ship.

Nothing like taking a list of 'nice to haves' and making yourself feel superior. Way to go Raswan, you're so unique and full of solutions. I hope you and all the other negativity on the internet sleep well tonight.

Assuming the hardware is equally 'good' b/w a SteamBox vs PC, then I choose the following:

1) If the SteamBox can do Steam games and other functions (eg. full Web, other non-steam title games, office, and other applications) at the same price or better than a PC, then "YES"; (hey, you get a nice, slick case with a Steam stick on it too)

2) If it's #2 and it allows switchable components, then it's a definate "YES" and bye bye PC 4ever.

3) If the SteamBox can only do Steam games and has no other functionality, then "NO";

I'm a big proponent of Steam. The DRM doesn't get in my way, I get access to games quickly without having to visit stores in the hopes they have copies, I get access to lots of indie software and I can move my entire game library to a new computer quickly and easily rather than having to download again or install from media.

Despite my support of them, I don't like this idea at all because it is controller based. This will give game companies even more reason to do such crappy console-to-pc ports. It will also give them reason to code a game for a narrow band of specs and not cater to anyone with slightly lower/higher specs.

We'll see more games coded to support 60fps regardless of detail, and expect the player to use a controller rather than a keyboard/mouose.

I hope Steam has some sort of program in place to ensure game companies do not slouch by coding for an ever smaller, more narrow set of hardware specs.

I can see problems with Steam introducing a design spec called, say, Level 1. Games are written to run on it just fine. Steam then releases a new level of specs to take advantage of hardware advances and call it Level 2. Then the game companies, wanting to keep sales at maximum, still code their new games for a Level 1 box while leaving the extra processing power of a Level 2 box unused. Players won't have reason to buy a Level 2 box and hence programmers won't have reason to write for a Level 2 box. We'll end up in classic console hell. Everyone stuck on old hardware.

Something has to be done to ensure that when a higher spec box is released, game companies are proded along to take advantage of it and players are prodded along to buy the better box. If not, it will really destroy PC gaming as we know it.

This box is perfect only for those who buy their computers from your local electronics store and would like access to pc titles. Is it for me? No not at all. I have my main PC for FPS type games and then I have another rig hooked up to the big screen for games such as Limbo, Shank and NFS. I made the mistake of buying the Alienware MP3 player and boombox/dock when it came out, I wont do that again. Lets hope Steam does it right and makes a great product that can help the gaming developers to come out with better games.

I think this is a brilliant idea. This could go a long way to really bringing PC gaming back the top. Console players like consoles because they are simple to setup and operate. If you give them the power of a PC with the simplicity of a console, it could be a console killer. Ideas like this just make me love Steam even more than I already do.

I think it's a great idea. Depending on the guts you would have a better visual experience than today's stand-alones, access to PC-only DLC and mods, and of course the full Steam catalog which is huge.

My only concern is would it be upgradeable so you wouldn't have to buy a new box ever 4-5 years like a regular console. Be nice if you could just slap in a new video card, RAM, etc.

That could be interesting. I wonder what kind of OS they would be running on it? Until firmer hardware specs were out, hard to say how much it would be worth, I probably would not pay much more than current console prices for one.

Actaully; my gaming rig is a Steam box. It serves the single purpose of playing games. Everything else I do on this machine.

Not really getting the whole purpose of the Steam Box to be perfectly honest. Is it for people who play consoles because they're too stupid to work Steam on computers? Really trying to wrap my head around this in a way that makes it make sense for a purpose that isn't stupid.

My guess (assuming this isn't just whispers and vaporware) would be the Steam Box is made to appeal to would-be PC gamers who want console-like simplicity. Stupid or lazy isn't necessarily the point -- convenience and simplicity is. You and I may be Maximum PCers, but the thought of building a gaming rig (especially an expensive one) puts off a lot of people who would otherwise be all over PC games. Heck, I know of a few friends of mine who would likely jump all over this if the price was right.

The real question, if you ask me, is whether or not that's a large enough niche of people to make the Steam Box a viable business idea.